The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022

[Somebody]

I somehow don't think Prince Charles envisions the York Princesses in his idea of the scaled down monarchy. I also think James and Louise may live relatively private lives and not do royal work.

I agree. I was just pointing out that there will be a scale-downed monarchy under Charles, unless he starts to solicit his nieces' and nephew's support - which seems rather unlikely.

 

[Fijiro]

I assume you mean Anne instead of Andrew...

I expect the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester to stick around as well if Charles would ask them to. The Duke of Gloucester is only 4 years older than Charles himself (so only 3 years older than the Duchess of Cornwall). And the Duchess of Gloucester is only 1 year older than Camilla and 2 years older than Charles.

Aug 1944: Duke of Gloucester
June 1946: Duchess of Gloucester
July 1947: Duchess of Cornwall
November 1948: Prince of Wales

The Duke of Kent however was born in October 1935; and his sister Alexandra in December 1936. So, that's more than a 10 year age gap. So, I hope as 85 and 84 year olds they will feel free to retire once Charles becomes (permanent) regent or king.

WOW how could I forget Princess Anne. With Anne that would make eight full senior working royals. I think they will probable rehabilitate Andrew..
.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Since Prince Philip retired from public life the number of royals undertaking official duties has already been scaled back:

Andrew - gone for good I think
Harry - gone for good as well
Meghan - gone for good

Alexandra hasn't had an engagement since last July so it seems she may very well have retired although there has been no such announcement.

The Duke of Kent hasn't had the best of health.

I can see Charles having - Charles, Camilla, William, Catherine, Edward, Sophie, Anne, Richard and Birgitte.

The big problem for the royals is age - in 11 years time they will have none under 50 and the children will still be at school with military training, university or other post school time to grow up ahead so at least 20 years before George et al come on board as working royals (assuming they do so that early rather than later as William was able to do).

I do not see Charles using the York princesses. If he doesn't use them he won't use Louise and James either.

 

[BriarRose]

Wow, I don't mean to get off-topic, but I had no idea the Duchess of Gloucester was born in 1946. She is aging beautifully.

I have always liked the Gloucesters, but I wouldn't fault them if they would like to retire soon. They have certainly done their duty. I will miss them though if they do.

I think when Charles becomes King that Anne and the Earl and Countess of Wessex will continue to be working royals. Anne will work until she can't, and she'll live a long time I have no doubt. Edward and Sophie, being younger, will be senior working royals for all of Charles' reign, and into the beginning of William's. (I'm not trying to start a debate, but I seriously doubt Andrew will return to royal duty ever.)

I think the real inevitable scale-down will be when William takes the throne. He and Kate will be the only working royals of their generation, likely assisted by the Earl and Countess of Wessex. And the Wessex adults will retire (naturally) at some point.

Obviously, George will be a full-time working royal, but not until he is in his thirties unless he is simply needed, and has to step up sooner. We likely won't know for some time if his siblings will be working royals, but Charlotte could be the future Princess Royal if she wants to be, and her father grants it.


So all this to say, the number of working royals will decrease when Charles becomes King, but I think the real change will be when William becomes King.

 

[travelguy]

The thing is though I do think the UK Public like the royals so much I mean I can't expect Charles not to make Archie or unborn daughter a Prince and Princess which means they most likely won't lead a normal life. Then Williams Children Children would be Prince/Princesses

 

[Iluvbertie]

Charlotte's children won't be royal as she is a girl and only male line grandchildren get to be royal.

 

[VictoriaB]

The thing is though I do think the UK Public like the royals so much I mean I can't expect Charles not to make Archie or unborn daughter a Prince and Princess which means they most likely won't lead a normal life. Then Williams Children Children would be Prince/Princesses

If they (Harry’s children) were living in the UK maybe but what’s the point in creating them Prince/Princess if they’re going to be raised in LA and not as members of the Royal Family except in name.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The point is that the instant Charles becomes King then Harry's children will be a Prince and Princess. If the Queen doesn't issue new Letters Patent to deny them before she dies then they will gain those titles automatically and then Charles will have to strip them after they have gained those titles.

 

[Alison H]

It depends how it goes. Charles, Camilla and Anne are all in their 70s. Hopefully they'll be in good health for many years to come, but they'll be well into their 80s before any of William's children are ready to take on royal duties.

 

[lucien]

Really....

It will be King Charles and Queen Camilla,and then the Heir and his family.That is scaling down.Like we have done here in NL for decades.

 

[Iluvbertie]

It depends how it goes. Charles, Camilla and Anne are all in their 70s. Hopefully they'll be in good health for many years to come, but they'll be well into their 80s before any of William's children are ready to take on royal duties.

I would say into their 90s. George is only 7 now and he won't be ready for another 20 years.

 

[Claire]

Completely agree however although there is a current line up of the 7. I do feel that they would need space in case something happens. But yes - European Royals have managed with less. They do have a problem in generations as essential by the time George is old enough they might have a number of very senior royals. Illness aside - there is no guarantee that Charlotte and Louis might want to take on a life of service in the royal family. The option of leaving now is very much open to them.

That all been said I also not 100% sold on Andrew not coming back into the fold or Harry/Meghan not coming back when Charles is King. And I have very good reasons for this.

 

[Iluvbertie]

In not much over a year's time they will have no working royals under 40 and that means no one for the younger generation. In another 10 years none under 50 and by the time George is ready they won't have any under 60. That is the issue.

 

[Sunnystar]

In not much over a year's time they will have no working royals under 40 and that means no one for the younger generation. In another 10 years none under 50 and by the time George is ready they won't have any under 60. That is the issue.

But this would have been true (or very nearly so) had Harry & Meghan remained in the fold. Meghan is the same age as William & Kate and Harry's not that much younger. If they want to go significantly younger then the only members of the BRF that fit that bill are Louise & James.

 

[Iluvbertie]

True. There is nothing they can do about it but it is still an issue ... as they simply are missing a generation of royals. The missing generation is also the one that is increasingly calling for an end to the monarchy.

 

[Mbruno]

But this would have been true (or very nearly so) had Harry & Meghan remained in the fold. Meghan is the same age as William & Kate and Harry's not that much younger. If they want to go significantly younger then the only members of the BRF that fit that bill are Louise & James.

The Countess of Wessex has said James and Louise might still choose to take up the HRH style when they are of age. I believe that will happen when Prince Edward becomes Duke of Edinburgh. At that point, James and Louise could also become working royals, and since there are only 13 and 17 now, they look like the best bet to fill in the youth gap.

Probably it won't happen because of the frenzy about "slimming down" the monarchy under Charles and William, but it would make sense to involve the Wessex children and the York girls too in the middle-age bracket.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

True. There is nothing they can do about it but it is still an issue ... as they simply are missing a generation of royals. The missing generation is also the one that is increasingly calling for an end to the monarchy.

It is not a missing generation but the expected and normal gap between generations in a system where members of the family do not marry and have children until their mid-30s.

The same gap will be expected to occur in every single generation unless family members begin having children at a much younger age. When a 35-year gap between parent and child exists, there will always be individuals who are 15-20 years older than the child and 15-20 years younger than the parent.

The narrower gap between the Wessex children and the children of their cousins exists only because Queen Elizabeth II began having children in her early 20s and continued to have children until her late 30s, leading to a large age gap between her oldest and youngest children.

 

[travelguy]

Do we think that Camilla and Kate would get the same sort of coverage like Philip has had when they both sadly pass? I was wondering as well if they would have been planning Camilla, Charles, Kate and William's funeral already?

 

[Somebody]

Do we think that Camilla and Kate would get the same sort of coverage like Philip has had when they both sadly pass? I was wondering as well if they would have been planning Camilla, Charles, Kate and William's funeral already?

They surely have plans in place for Charles and Camilla and probably less elaborate plans for William and Catherine.

 

[Somebody]

It is not a missing generation but the expected and normal gap between generations in a system where members of the family do not marry and have children until their mid-30s.

The same gap will be expected to occur in every single generation unless family members begin having children at a much younger age. When a 35-year gap between parent and child exists, there will always be individuals who are 15-20 years older than the child and 15-20 years younger than the parent.

The narrower gap between the Wessex children and the children of their cousins exists only because Queen Elizabeth II began having children in her early 20s and continued to have children until her late 30s, leading to a large age gap between her oldest and youngest children.

Exactly, and the advantage of an at least 30-year age gap is that the heir might be expect to not be of retirement age when ascending the throne and have a reasonable length of reign.

And as you point out, there is currently a younger generation: Louise and James - but that doesn't seem to make a difference; just like Edward and Sophie for a long time were the youngest senior working royals but didn't get a large following because of it.

 

[Fijiro]

Do we think that Camilla and Kate would get the same sort of coverage like Philip has had when they both sadly pass? I was wondering as well if they would have been planning Camilla, Charles, Kate and William's funeral already?

I think the State funerals are only for Sovereigns - televised
Consorts to the Sovereigns get Ceremonial like the one the Queen Mother got - televised. This is what Prince Philip would've had if there was no COVID. And although Diana was not a consort to the Sovereign, I believe for her they copied the Queen Mother's plan since her death was so sudden and had not been planned.
Other members of the family get private - not televised.

 

[Sunnystar]

Do we think that Camilla and Kate would get the same sort of coverage like Philip has had when they both sadly pass? I was wondering as well if they would have been planning Camilla, Charles, Kate and William's funeral already?

Honestly, if Kate lives another 60 years, which will mean she would have been a member of the BRF for 70 years, then, yes, I think she'll get the same sort of coverage that Philip is getting today.

And Charles would absolutely get the same sort of coverage, perhaps greater, since he has been the heir apparent for nearly 70 years; though if he succeeds to the throne before he dies, his coverage will be greater than Philip's. Similar scenario with William.

I'm not sure I can see Camilla getting the same level of coverage, even if she dies after Charles ascends to the throne, simply because she'll not have been a part of the BRF for most people's lives the way that Philip, Elizabeth, and likely Charles will have been (and Kate and William if they live into their 90s).

 

[Stefan]

I think the State funerals are only for Sovereigns - televised
Consorts to the Sovereigns get Ceremonial like the one the Queen Mother got - televised.

But wasn't the funeral of the Queen Mother almost a State Funeral only not in Name. And i think they only difference is that the coffin is drawn by members of the Royal Navy. .

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Would it be incorrect if Princess Beatrice or Princess Eugenie spoke up and inquired to become part time working royals? Could a position be found for them?

 

[royal-blue]

I don't see why George can't do the occasional engagement or take on a couple of patronages when he is 18/20/21? Surely Harry and William didn't wait until they were over 30 before doing even the smallest amount of royal activities?

 

[royal-blue]

I don't see why George can't do the occasional engagement or take on a couple of patronages when he is 18/20/21? Surely Harry and William didn't wait until they were over 30 before doing even the smallest amount of royal activities?

Edit: just had a look at Wikipedia and William started the occasional royal duty when he was 21:

"At the age of 21, Prince William was appointed as a Counsellor of State; he first served in that capacity when the Queen was in Nigeria attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in 2003. On his 21st birthday, William accompanied his father on a tour of Wales, visiting the Anglesey Food Fair and opening a centre for the homeless in Newport. In July 2005, he embarked on his first solo overseas tour, travelling to New Zealand, to participate in World War II commemorations on behalf of the Queen."

 

[Claire]

The problem isn't that George during a few engagements at a young age - but he isn't likely to join the the full ranks of the firm at a young age. Essentially he might be at uni, military training, military career or want some time with a young family. The same things William were given which is why William essentially started in the firm relatively late - he was given that privileges'.

I think Anne joined the firm proper at 19 which will be considered way too early now. Edward was half half from 18 till full on at 36. And Andrew was only only full on when we left the Navy.

 

[Claire]

Would it be incorrect if Princess Beatrice or Princess Eugenie spoke up and inquired to become part time working royals? Could a position be found for them?

I think there has been a bit of talk about it within the palace and we might see something in the new year. But it must be remembered that it will be a step down for Charles and his desire for a smaller monarchy. And after years of telling Andrew that there was no need for the York Princesses it is a bit of a problem when there is suddenly - if only to Charles's ego.

That been said it is the same problem he will have with Edward and Sophie who were told that they will be moved to a Duke of Gloucester role and the Kent, Gloucester's who were told they will have a lesser role. Everyone has been scuffled about and future plans have changed. But that happens in the best of time. But it will require some humble pie on Charles part or he will have a very tiny royal family.

 

[Denville]

I dont tnink so. Better a smaller royal family that one can count on that one you cna't count on.. and IMO Bea and Eugenie certianly dont want royal duties at this stage of their lives. Had it happened when they were 21 or so, I think they would have been OK wiht it, but the time's passed and now they are both married and likley to be preoccupied iwht their own lives.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

And as you point out, there is currently a younger generation: Louise and James - but that doesn't seem to make a difference; just like Edward and Sophie for a long time were the youngest senior working royals but didn't get a large following because of it.

Good point. I doubt Louise and James would receive much public attention in the event that they became working royals, regardless of their youth.